biblewikiaorg-20200223-history
Talk:Book of the Generations of Adam
Should there be a page for this? I want to ask some fellow Bible Wiki community members, do you think the "Book of the Generations of Adam" should have its own article at this time (I am sure it could one day, or if not - get a description in the authorship section of Genesis)? Typically we do not have articles on specific chapters of the Bible (in this rare case, the article name Genesis 5 or any variants could be redirected here); but this is not about the chapter itself, this would be about the so called "Book" referenced in verse 1Gen 5:1. This article would focus on the features of the genealogy of Adam presented in the chapter, as originally being its own separate document, that Moses later included into Genesis. Obviously there is not a lot of information, but based on the evidences of Moses writing Genesis and the Hebrew word sepher (indicates an actual written document, not oral tradition). Clearly this document could have been used as a source document for the first few chapters of Genesis. What distinguishes this from the chapter itself is that it would not be about the contents of the chapter itself, nor the genealogical information; in fact the book is distinct from the chapter itself, because Moses specifically attributes it as its own book (Chapter 5 as a whole would be information in addition to the book in its entirety). Similarly, articles of genealogical books could be created with similar circumstances. Should this or should it not have an article? I think covering books like these that are source documents not only would complement our goal of "comprehensiveness"; but allows reader to get a much deeper understanding of how the Bible was written than what you get just from sunday school. Sadly, many simply live on the facts of "God inspired the Bible" and neglect the human/artistic methods (that God spurred on to happen). In today's world with lots of scholarly criticism of the Bible, more "scholastic" subjects (that give logical explanations for things) in a way that does not disavow inspiration is desperately needed. In Christ, Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 21:51, June 14, 2017 (UTC) Re: Sepher is Hebrew Word for book I would have to look into this more before I give a yes or no, but the NIV says that the passage was "the written account" of the generations of Adam. Hopefully our "scholar" can give some input on this. For some readers it may seem unnecessary or even a stretch. I am curious as of what the actual text really says, whether it is a copy of an earlier source or the account simply is the written version. Christian Sirolli (Talk | ) 23:55, June 14, 2017 (UTC) :He (the scholar) has not only confirmed that it is a "book" to me directly, but the Hebrew word here is "sepher", which means an actual written record (but not a "book" as hardbound, as you know). In comparison, most other instances of Genesis with the phrasing of "accounts", uses the word toledoth , which means "generations" (apparently its from the verb meaning "to bear offspring"). NIV tends to be closer to a paraphrase than a literal translation. You will notice that rather than saying"generations" when the word toledoth is used, it will use the word "account" (same word they used for sepher). :This is also the same for "laws", where NIV uses "records" instead of the literal Hebrew word. In those cases, NIV uses a word with the best and most widely understood meaning. It is of little importance doctrinally and to the content of Scripture whether or not things are represented as "true books" or as "accounts". This is easy to find by typing the word "account" in an NIV Bible and then comparing the verses with other translations. The most precise meaning is best obtained from the interlinears. : Obviously this page can't go on and on, because there is barely any direct information given in text. I was unsure if this would be worth an article, but I feel that it may be a very unique article both for our content base and perhaps (hopefully- even if it's one day '') be an interesting new insight to readers. : In Christ, Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 01:50, June 15, 2017 (UTC) ::If we were to have this article, I would think it would be similar to the House of Adam, but in article form rather than in list form. We could have links referring to it, using and/or . Christian Sirolli (Talk | ) 10:51, June 15, 2017 (UTC) ::I think it would be utterly pointless to have a repeat article on Adam's genealogy, that is already covered in "House of Adam". If this to be an article, it needs to be about its own subject. There's no reason to repeat genealogies in two different formats. SouthWriter has told me personally he think I should go on and create the article, but I will leave him to add his comments officially for the record. In Christ, Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 15:18, June 15, 2017 (UTC) :::I'd say go with it. The account of Adam's line is more than just chapter 5. It continues through the flood. The generations of Noah begins at 10:1. :::SouthWriter (talk) 16:08, June 15, 2017 (UTC) ::::Who should begin to write it? Christian Sirolli (Talk | ) 22:28, June 15, 2017 (UTC) ::::I will take up writing it, I just created it now but will add more to it today/tommorow. In Christ, Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 22:31, June 15, 2017 (UTC) Infobox for a non canon book? I am not sure if the article should have an infobox, since its not canon. The Infobox ''looks nice I just don't know if there is either enough information or authority in the book to give it is own infobox.In a sense, the book in its entirety is part of canonical Scripture; but it doesn't exist anymore outside of it being part of Genesis. This wouldn't undermine it having its own article (as it certaintly has qualities that could be useful in understanding how Scripture was written in the human method), but I didn't see the Infobox as intended to be used for non-canonical books- then again I didn't think of any non-canonical books that would be here on to begin with. I post this here for deliberation (as someone could convince me with good logic). In Christ, Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 23:55, June 15, 2017 (UTC) :The infobox's name suggest that it is for any book that we have an article about. Being that it is not Canon, not all of the parameters apply to it, just like not all of the parameters of the infobox person apply to all articles on people. The point of an infobox is to give quick, basic information so readers don't have to read all of the article. If they want more information, they read the article. This is the way wikipedia has it set up there and it is the same way everywhere that uses this program. Christian Sirolli (Talk | ) 17:51, June 17, 2017 (UTC)